Early Rogers Beavertail Lugs (a fine point)

The first beavertails had springs to hold the inserts in place. That, along with heavier lug bodies, made them heavier. It's part of the appeal of the flat gray interior era drums. I don't know exactly when they went to C-clips to hold the inserts in place. It's the other end of the spectrum from the light weight Fullerton hardware. BUT, the springs can make noise when recording, so cotton, or something, was or is often stuffed in the casings to stop the noise. It made me think that I prefer the early C-clip lugs. I suppose that the 3 ply shells, combined with spring lugs might be the ultimate? Any thought? Ace
P.S. My mardi gras Tower/Powertone snare in my avatar has springless lugs. It has me thinking.
P.P.S. If they made Holiday snares with tall rims and beavertails with springs, that would be a heavy drum.

The very first generation beavertail lugs had springs with no felt inserts in them. Those were short lived as Rogers realized the springs made noise, so they quickly put felt inserts in with the springs, which fixed the problem. My understanding is the c-clip lugs started being put on the drums late in the Dayton era, and were in full effect by the move to Fullerton.

What you're saying is all very subjective RE: that combo of lugs and shell being the ultimate. I personally disagree with you. The decline in quality started after CBS bought the company out, and then moved the factory out of Covington, OH. When Rogers was at its peak, they were making beefy, heavy duty, quality lugs - which had the springs in them. They were no problem once felt was installed. The fact that they put the felt in there and took that much care with their products is proof for me that the drums that came out of that period in 1963-1966 were the ultimate. But again, that's just my opinion. The springless, c-clip lugs scream lower quality to me, as I have them associated with the Fullerton script and Big R drums, which I don't think were nearly as quality as the ones made in Covington. But those lugs may not scream cheap to someone else, like yourself. It's all subjective!

It’s definetly a fine point Ace . I’d argue anyone could tell the difference blindfolded !
Luke , Pretty sure the Clip lugs came about 71-72 . All of the early Fullerton drums I’ve had/have are the spring versions, leftover Dayton stock. I like all of them

Also, don't forget that the very early beavertail lugs used the same mounting screws as the B&B lugs. These could snap the lug boss upon removal, so Rogers changed to a screw with a different thread pattern.

My favorite Rogers lug story Joe Thompson designed the hollow chambered drawn brass lug to create a bell like chamber for the drum sound to reverberate. Ok I don’t know if it’s true but I sure do like it!

My favorite Rogers lug story Joe Thompson designed the hollow chambered drawn brass lug to create a bell like chamber for the drum sound to reverberate. Ok I don’t know if it’s true but I sure do like it!

Click to expand...

Also, it's kinda funny that Rogers had an idea for a thin brass lug (whoops) and replaced it with one of the heaviest lugs.

My favorite Rogers lug story Joe Thompson designed the hollow chambered drawn brass lug to create a bell like chamber for the drum sound to reverberate. Ok I don’t know if it’s true but I sure do like it!

Click to expand...

Joe Thompson was an expert at repairing horns, and he had an appreciation for brass as a musical material. Unfortunately, the problems with the lugs were there almost from the beginning, and the decision was made after a few years to replace them with a new lug design. The beavertail was really attractive (imho), and bulletproof (except for the first version which used really large mounting screws. These left the screw bosses too thin and they broke off easily. A short period of time later, the updated version we know and love was made. Not too many of the earlier ones around.)

I have always believed they made the beavertails so solid and heavy in order to completely eliminate any chance of a problem. They were very customer oriented and I'm sure the customers being unhappy about the b&b's had them highly motivated.

As they got into the Dayton years, the lugs got lighter and the felts were eliminated. I don't know how much money the lighter lugs saved, but they made the drums lighter, and maybe some buyers thought that was a good thing. The springs remained until the early 70's. A lot of folks think the springs were eliminated as a cost-saving move. Maybe so. But as recording technology got better, the springs making any noise would be picked up by the mics in a studio, not a good thing. So, out they went.

The cast leg mounts were developed to eliminate the problem of spinning 2-piece leg mounts, a nice idea. Only the vintage guys, 50 years later, think that was a bad idea because we are so in love with the early stuff. And that's ok.

Same with the cast collet noses. They are really a nice bit of design work, and they were developed to eliminate the problem of the handles breaking off on the steel collet noses. They looked nice, were easier on the fingers and the plating on them was superior. Unfortunately, whomever engineered them didn't realize that the cast material was a bad choice for the outer edge where the tension on the hex rods is most intense. They should have put a steel insert in there as a reinforcement. I think it took a pretty long time for the problem to become widespread, and by then the ML stuff was on the way.

By the way, the chrome on the later stuff is much better overall. (Except for the early high hoops, which had beautiful chrome, as did the b&b lugs. Being brass the lugs were the perfect material to be plated, for the chemistry involved). The finish on the later 1-piece leg mounts for example, is really nice. The hoops look better in most cases as do other parts. Maybe the CBS situation was a mess, but not everything was bad. And at some point they started using 2 badges on the ride toms, a great idea.

John Cermanaro, one of their chief engineers, has stated in interviews that there was a cadre of guys who struggled to keep things on track, and were mostly successful. For example, the Memriloc stuff got done, and was a design that was way ahead of it's time. And no one can argue with the advances represented in the XP8 shell design.

As time goes on, I've learned to appreciate all of the output of the Rogers company, their pluses and minuses.

I think of it this way. I had a 59 Caddy back in the late 60's, a car that was beautiful and luxurious and I loved it. But I wouldn't want it as a daily driver today, too thirsty and too expensive to maintain and too hard on brakes, front suspension parts , etc , and no safety equipment. Would I want it today, except as a garage queen? No way...